No doubt what I write is frightening to many. But the reality is that Christianity has something very special - by parables, the teaching of thought in a parallel dimension beyond that which the overt text implies.

My "sin" is to take that practice to find where its limits are . . . and in that exploration wonders are revealed.

When one starts to find that the texts are not bounded by the accepted meanings promoted by the organised religion, one finds that the paradise of the Garden of Eden is not a paradise at all and its walls drop unbounded. It's only then that as children we can put away childish things in the spirit of Corinthians 13, and grow in fertility of thought, alive to thought, among the weeds and thistles that want to choke us and see not in a glass darkly.

In its radicalised form, literal "fundamentalist" Christianity does not reach beyond the Christianity of "childish things". Adults away from the Church have found it difficult to rediscover the truth of Father Christmas as they grow up themselves with children. Religion, faith nor understanding of God does not stop at the stage at which we discover that Father Christmas does not exist.

In reliance on the supernatural, "believers" can cease to take responsibility for themselves, in absence of understanding the work of the Creator and the instruction book on "how to Create".

As a result our Angels and Saints delegated to help and look after us unseen have such a lot extra of work to do that their presence isn't as frequently witnessed as it might be on account of their efforts having to be so diluted. An Italian friend says that it's better to pray for the assistance of other Saints, such as Anthony, as Mary herself is so overworked. I'm most certainly a supporter of the Trades Union of Overworked Angels, which encourages people to learn how to do it themselves rather than have to rely on others for the whole of their lives.

The Church would have such support were it to teach how to be Father Christmas* , as those of us who have children find ourselves to be, rather than relying on Father Christmas.

I often visit the website Pray As You Go, which, through spoken daily readings and related questions, encourages people to view the teachings of Jesus from their own personal standpoint - to be alive to thought, as you say. It's a very thought-provoking and helpful website. Every day's session starts with some music and then leads into the spoken bit.

I often visit the website Pray As You Go, which, through spoken daily readings and related questions, encourages people to view the teachings of Jesus from their own personal standpoint - to be alive to thought, as you say. It's a very thought-provoking and helpful website. Every day's session starts with some music and then leads into the spoken bit.

It's one of those strange things about God that when one goes in a special direction, relevant things will come.

Today's reading is actually upon a theme of this thread - "Search and you will find" and the prayer pondering about what is not quite right about ourselves . . . and that all we have to do is to ask . . .

Not merely individually but collectively The Church can ask the same, and when it does, more support will come.

When we hear something of which we think we know the meaning of what we hear from what we are told . . . that is the position from which to search, and to knock on the door for the meanings that are hidden behind the closed door. And the door will be opened.

Thank you so much for this site, I'm sure it will be useful to all.

So many people act without prayer, whereas prayer in the consciousness of the creator is so much more powerful than life in the consciousness of the unknowing.

People without understanding of "God" cannot start to know the forces of the unseen, all powerful, all knowing and universally everywhere way in which the world, and all else, works . . . a hidden dimension of cause and effect. In the material world we might see a car. We might see a car move. But without understanding of forces, which are hidden, and powerful, we cannot understand the motion of the car, whether it will continue to move, or to stop, other than an observer of a 2 dimensional image on a television screen. Without understanding the forces, we are subject to the randomness of what we don't understand, but understanding how those forces work puts us in the driving seat.

These walls about which he's speaking are physical, but the walls of interpretation in our minds are much more powerful.

When we can break down the walls of our minds, then we will be "Christian" and "Muslim" and "Judaic" and "Hindu" and "Buddhist" too.

Not until we do can we possibly understand "God".

When the Church invites others in, and reads texts of common understanding in parallel with our own, the real effect of the Creator will start to work, and churches, bells and organs will have their futures assured.

Yes - that's an important observation - and the Churches that build the most bridges putting the most "+" between people will be the most successful and "x" their support.

Today I met a plumber repairing the heating system of the local church.

He doesn't go to church other than to do plumbing. I asked him why not - and the reasons werea. that the religions were out of date, their book writers being thousands of years agob. that so much war and killing has been done in the name of religion it's a load of rubbish.

That's the typical view of the man in the street.

I explained the idea of 1 PLUS 1 and the parable of the talents as being an amazing insight into how matter was constructed, and that events in life are able to be understood in the same way, and he was able to understand.

I explained the idea for Christian churches to confine readings to Jesus' teachings about the Creator, putting other things that divide for later consideration, and inviting other people of other faiths to read the second lesson from other agreeing texts, and he thought it was a great idea.

When the Church builds these bridges, it will be relevant and the Church's future will be assured.

There's much more to draw together than to argue about.

In this thread, above, we've looked at how Christianity drew upon Dionysian worship - the reflection in the mirror - the understanding of the other and from the other side, the deity who was killed and resurrected and who offers eternal life. The Deity as "The Life Force of all growing things" - one can't really get closer to The Creator, God of Life, Living God, than that.

With Paul above, in argument about an atheist understanding of that which creates as the Creator, we narrowed down a difference in belief as to whether the "Intelligence" that we perceive in the Creator is internal or external to the universe. Really does this point matter? The important thing is that we can perceive an intelligence to what gives life.

Heroes of admiration since the Renaissance . . . Blake, Milton, Shelley, Leonardo de Vinci were influenced by the Egyptian and Greek philosophy handed down from Hermes Trimegistus. Why does the New Testiment tell us of Jesus journey to Egypt in the beginning? It's where he started. The book by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy is essential illumination.

"Atum is Light - the everlasting source of energy - the eternal dispenser of Life Itself"

Clearly the "Life Force of all growing things" is not far away.

Nor is - that dreaded thing - Sun Worship!"The sun is an image of God, and as God gives Life to the whole universe, so the sun gives life to the animals and plants of the Earth. The light of the sun nurtures nature in the same way that the Light of God nurtures our souls"

Is that very far from Christianity?

What is the Mind of God? It's the Mind of the Cosmos and everything within the Cosmos is part of it. And the Cosmos is the reflection of God.

How can we tell which side of the mirror glass we are on? Does the reflection that we see as God have to be outside the Cosmos . . . or can that reflection be a projection of that which is within?

Is this far from Christianity . . . ? And is there a right answer? If that right answer is only a matter of opinion which divides, it's not the right answer that the Creator gives.

What is time? Hermes instructs that there is no time.

The Past has gone, and does not exist. The Future has not happened yet, so does not exist. The present disappears as fast as it appears, and is less than a blink of an eye, an illusion that does not exist. So the only time that exists is eternity.

- - - - - - - - - What is eternal life? That which exists outside the realm of the instant. It's to that which Jesus invites us to join him . . . in this life. And that's the life to which Jesus was resurrected.

Perhaps at Easter all might be resurrected to eternal life. Life which exists outside the realm of the instant.

So in throwing away our teddy bears, there is everything of value in Christianity and in building bridges, with people of other religions, and with the previous religions which were part of the universal understandings of the ancients, the Church has everything to gain.

Further to ideas above in this thread the Hermetica gives some clues. We've explored above whether the "Creator" is external or internal to the Universe, or Cosmos, and as to whether that intelligence responsible for the Creation is external or internally inherent to the process.

I have been accused of atheism for suggesting that the intelligence of creation is inherent to itself, and that all results from the operation of "plus" and "multiply" of matter, and relevant to us, people cooperating with each other, inherent to our cosmos within.

Hermes Trimegistus refers to "the self fertilising womb" . . .

Isn't that amazing . . . that the Virgin Mary (not in the original texts) is self fertilising?

Isn't the Virgin Mary, symbolising the Mother of the Creator symbolising the Cosmos symbolising the self fertility of the Cosmos itself?

Really is the rather academic issue of whether the intelligence of the Creation internal or external to the Cosmos rather an esoteric issue? Is it enough for people to fight about it? Between religions? Between theists and atheists?

Is it enough to frighten people away in terror?

As a self intelligent Cosmos which obviously has a self awareness, all are part of it, and all, each of us is part of the intelligence of Creation. Shouldn't we be rather more about being aware of being intelligent about what the intelligence of the Creator process at the root of such intelligence wants each of us to play our part?

That's what in doing the Church can be most successful in leading the way.

I wish the church would highlight the widespread flippant and offensive use of the initials OMG. Anyone who does revere the Almighty as their God wouldn't say that. The words "Oh my God" are often used as an opening to prayer. To say "My God" is to acknowledge something very profound. The fourth Commandment says "Do not take the Lord's name in vain." Saying OMG does just that. (I know this doesn't reply to what's been posted here, but it needs to be said. Thanks.)

What was the Creator? The authors in mistranslation had to correct the word to "Nature". What is God if it is not Nature? What is the Creator if it is not Nature itself, part of the universe, the cosmos?

Why do we have to have bloodchilling, bloodspilling, arguments about whether the intelligence of "Creation", the intelligence of the Cosmos, the self fertilising womb just as DNA is self instructing hardware, is internal or external to the Cosmos - as to creation by an external intelligent being or whether the Cosmos is internally self intelligent?

Does it make that much difference? Indeed is there any difference?

The fact remains that the wisdom taught to us by Jesus' parables in applying the principles of the Creator, the principles of Nature alike, to our own very lives has validity either way.

By adopting the teachings of Jesus, rather than merely promoting worship of him, the Church has a good hand to play.

I wish the church would highlight the widespread flippant and offensive use of the initials OMG.

It seems to me that the Americans are the worst offenders. "Oh my Gaaard!" appears to be the preferred expression whenever they are surprised or outraged!. And I was led to believe that they tend to be more religious than the average Brit.

: Good afternoon, Mr. LaRouche, this is D— from the Bronx. I have a very touchy question to ask. It's in regard to the closing of churches. In the past, I'd say three years, four churches were closed in our 20-block area around the church that I attend. Have you any idea, could you give us any insight as to what's causing it and what we can do to keep them open? Because as one of the only means by which people in the community...?

LAROUCHE: Well, you've got one real problem to deal with. First of all, the degeneration of the morals, of the citizens of the United States, since the beginning of the 20th century, that is since the birth, so to speak, of Bertrand Russell, there has been a consistent degeneracy in every respect, not just in this religion or that, but in every respect, which has been becoming worse, and worse, and worse. And that's the problem.

Yes, the religious question comes in. But it is not clearly understood what the religious question is. There is a meaning, but, what's the meaning? What's the basis of the existence of a baby? How does a baby come into existence, and what is the consequence of the baby existing? Well, if the baby is smart, the baby will be smarter than its parents? And it will be an actual achievement, not some kind of boo-boo this or that, boo-boo that.

So therefore, when people are being religious, there are two kinds of religious. One is a concentration on understanding of the meaning of mankind's life, from the birth to the termination of that life; and that termination of that life is the instrument which brings mankind into improvements, in the understanding of what mankind's mission is in the universe. And if you can look at it that way, which is I think is the only short-term way of expressing it, you have the solution. You have to understand what's the requirement? What is the goal of man's existence, after the parents of the man or so forth, have died? Is the man who lived after the parents had died, did that have a meaning? Is there some causal effect of that? Yes! And the question is, how does society help mankind realize that opportunity?

Q: [follow-up] Thank you very much for the information, sir. And I hope that things progress in our affair here in New York City.

LAROUCHE: Good. Very Good.

Q: Hi, Lyn. Just on that, in fact, adding on what we've been talking about before, I wanted to brief you on what we've been doing in Brooklyn to build this Messiah we're doing on Easter Sunday. And the idea, what I wanted to communicate is, this church we're going to be performing at, is in an area quite similar area to the last one. And, in fact, what's happened in this area, since those two performances we did in December, of the Messiah, there's been a great reverberation in these communities around these two performances that we did. And that's having now an impact on what we're doing now to build this next one, which is at a church which has—which was almost shut down in 2011. Right now they're resurrecting this church, which is about 30 years older than the Statue of Liberty. And it has amazing acoustics.

And so right now, what we're doing, is creating a major field in this area, where you have now a lot of people very excited about the process. In fact, one lady told me, because I've been going to her place of business for the whole time this has been going on, she told me that "I like seeing this saga unfold, what you guys are doing." So there's a whole development that's being shaped by this. And you can see, as we're going through this whole process, you can see that the more we have of this music program, the more you're actually going to create a real process of development, much like Lorenzo Da Ponte did in shaping the Italian culture in New York in the early 1800s, where he actually created the opera culture.

I've been thinking about that, on top of also doing this whole process as well. So I wanted to see what your comments were on that.

LAROUCHE: No the point is, this kind of process is well known. The relationship to the Italian model, is really very significantly known, and it's distinctive. There's a German version, which is also somewhat differently tuned, but it's the same kind of thing.

So these kinds of forms, they're not based on religion as such; it's not explicitly religion, as such; it's on the idea that mankind has a role beyond its society, and that is the role. It takes the form that's often called religious form. But you have to be very careful about this, because there are religions, and there are religions and so forth and so on; and you've got to make sure you've got the right message. But the point is, yes, there is a process of this nature.

But the key thing is, you've got to get people to stop thinking about looking at the graveyards. They've got to look at the future embodied in the human being. And we have to take the child, the child of parents; is this child going to be a creative force for mankind? That's the issue! The purpose is to have people who are good people. But! what you really need, what mankind needs, when you think about how many evil people there are running around in the United States right now, you say, "Wait a minute!" This is not just a name, something to name. The point is that you want people, young people, who will develop themselves into becoming a creative force for the future of mankind. And if you don't have that, you've lost the message!

Considering the nature of the discussion I have linked to, the quoted text appears in its midst?

EricKB7DQH

Logged

The objective is to reach human immortality—that is, to create things which are necessary to mankind, necessary to the purpose of the existence of mankind, and which have become the fruit that drives the creation of a higher state of mankind than ever existed before."